IMF Prediction with Cosmic Rays THE BASIC IDEA: Find signatures in the cosmic ray flux that are predictive of the future behavior of the interplanetary.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed.
Advertisements

THREE-DIMENSIONAL ANISOTROPIC TRANSPORT OF SOLAR ENERGETIC PARTICLES IN THE INNER HELIOSPHERE CRISM- 2011, Montpellier, 27 June – 1 July, Collaborators:
MURI,2008 Electric Field Variability and Impact on the Thermosphere Yue Deng 1,2, Astrid Maute 1, Arthur D. Richmond 1 and Ray G. Roble 1 1.HAO National.
Investigation of daily variations of cosmic ray fluxes in the beginning of 24 th solar activity cycle Ashot Chilingarian, Bagrat Mailyan IHY-ISWI Regional.
Olga Khabarova & Vladimir obridko Heliophysical Laboratory, Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radio Wave Propagation RAS (IZMIRAN), Moscow,
Cosmic Ray Using for Monitoring and Forecasting Dangerous Solar Flare Events Lev I. Dorman (1, 2) 1. Israel Cosmic Ray & Space Weather Center and Emilio.
Solar and Interplanetary Sources of Geomagnetic disturbances Yu.I. Yermolaev, N. S. Nikolaeva, I. G. Lodkina, and M. Yu. Yermolaev Space Research Institute.
ICMEs and Magnetic Clouds Session Summary Charlie Farrugia and Lan Jian.
4/18 6:08 UT 4/17 6:09 UT Average polar cap flux North cap South cap… South cap South enter (need to modify search so we are here) South exit SAA Kress,
Petukhov I.S., Petukhov S.I. Yu.G. Shafer Institute for Cosmophysical Research and Aeronomy SB RAS 21st European Cosmic Ray Symposium in Košice, Slovakia.
Cosmic Rays and Space Weather Erwin O. Flückiger Laurent Desorgher, Rolf Bütikofer, Benoît Pirard Physikalisches Institut University of Bern
Towards a European Infrastructure for Lunar Observatories Bremen, Wednesday 23 rd March 2005 A 3D cosmic ray detector on the Moon X. Moussas University.
Workshop on Extension of the European Neutron Monitor Database October 13-15, 2010 Newark, Delaware Spaceship Earth John W. Bieber Bartol Research Institute.
SHINE 2008 June, 2008 Utah, USA Visit our Websites:
Solar Extreme Events 2005, Armenia September 2005 Extreme Ground Level Enhancements Observed by Spaceship Earth John W. Bieber University of Delaware,
Radiation conditions during the GAMMA-400 observations:
CR variation during the extreme events in November 2004 Belov (a), E. Eroshenko(a), G. Mariatos ©, H. Mavromichalaki ©, V.Yanke (a) (a) IZMIRAN), ,
CME-GEOMETRY AND COSMIC-RAY ANISOTROPY OBSERVED BY A PROTOTYPE MUON DETECTOR NETWORK K. Munakata 1, T. Kuwabara 1, J. W. Bieber 2, P. Evenson 2, R. Pyle.
SHINE Meeting, July 31 – August 4, 2006 Neutron Monitor Observations of the January 20, 2005 Ground Level Enhancement John W. Bieber 1, John Clem 1, Paul.
Spring 2004 AGU Meeting, Montreal SH33A-02 UNUSUAL FEATURES OF THE OCTOBER 28, 2003 GROUND LEVEL ENHANCEMENT John W. Bieber 1, Paul Evenson 1, Roger Pyle.
Ground Level Enhancement of May 17, 2012 Observed at South Pole SH21A-2183 Takao Kuwabara 1,3 ; John Bieber 1 ; John Clem 1,3 ; Paul Evenson 1,3 ; Tom.
Ultimate Spectrum of Solar/Stellar Cosmic Rays Alexei Struminsky Space Research Institute, Moscow, Russia.
A.V. Belov 1, E. A. Eroshenko 1, H. Mavromichalaki 2, V.A. Oleneva 1, A. Papaioannou 2, G. Mariatos 2, V. G. Yanke 1 (1) Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism,
Statistical properties of southward IMF and its geomagnetic effectiveness X. Zhang, M. B. Moldwin Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic, and Space Sciences,
February 7, Antarctica and the Global Neutron Monitor Network Paul Evenson University of Delaware Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Ground level enhancement of the solar cosmic rays on January 20, A.V. Belov (a), E.A. Eroshenko (a), H. Mavromichalaki (b), C. Plainaki(b), V.G.
Paul Evenson June CAU Kiel April 20, 2010 Solar Physics with the IceTop Air Shower Array Paul Evenson University of Delaware Department of Physics.
CME trajectory deduced from cosmic ray measurements K. Munakata, T. Kuwabara and J. W. Bieber.
Extreme Space Weather Project, Ottawa October 17-19, 2011 Ground-Based Cosmic Ray Detectors for Space Weather Applications John W Bieber University of.
1 20 January 2005: Session Summary SHINE 2006 Zermatt, Utah, 31 July - 4 August Invited Talks Riley: what was the Alfven speed in the corona at.
THE EARTH’S MAGNETIC FIELD Note; The geographical north pole acts like the south pole of a magnet.
1 IGY The ALERT signal of ground level enhancements of solar cosmic rays: physics basis, the ways of realization and development Anashin V., Belov A.,
Uppsala University June 9, 2009
Plasma Density Structures in the Inner Magnetosphere Derived From RPI Measurements B. Reinisch 1, X. Huang 1, P. Song 1, J. Green 2, S. Fung 2 V. Vasyliunas.
NMDB - the European neutron monitor database Karl-Ludwig Klein, for the NMDB consortium.
IMF Prediction with Cosmic Rays THE BASIC IDEA: Find signatures in the cosmic ray flux that are predictive of the future behavior of the interplanetary.
Application of neutrino spectrometry
27-Day Variations Of The Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity And Anisotropy In Different Solar Magnetic Cycles ( ) M.V. Alania, A. Gil, K. Iskra, R.
MuSTAnG – Muon Spaceweather Telescope for Anisotropies at Greifswald * Poster Content Space Weather Physics behind Cosmic Ray Muon Anisotropy MuSTAnG Consortium.
Effective drift velocity and initiation times of interplanetary type-III radio bursts Dennis K. Haggerty and Edmond C. Roelof The Johns Hopkins University.
SN 1987A as a Possible Source of Cosmic Rays with E 0 < eV by Yakutsk EAS Array Data A.V. Glushkov, L.T. Ksenofontov, M.I. Pravdin Yu.G. Shafer Institute.
Cosmic rays at sea level. There is in nearby interstellar space a flux of particles—mostly protons and atomic nuclei— travelling at almost the speed of.
Daniel Matthiä(1)‏, Bernd Heber(2), Matthias Meier(1),
RHESSI Observation of Atmospheric Gamma Rays from Impact of Solar Energetic Particles on 21 April 2002.
Athens University – Faculty of Physics Section of Nuclear and Particle Physics Athens Neutron Monitor Station Study of the ground level enhancement of.
Fall 2004 AGU Meeting, San Francisco SH31B-07 GROUND-BASED COSMIC RAY DETECTORS FOR SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL RESEARCH AND SPACE WEATHER FORECASTING John W. Bieber.
Yu.G. Shafer Institute of Cosmophysical Research and Aeronomy of SB RAS Transparency of a magnetic cloud boundary for cosmic rays I.S. Petukhov, S.I. Petukhov.
1 TEMPERATURE EFFECT OF MUON COMPONENT AND PRACTICAL QUESTIONS OF ITS ACCOUNT IN REAL TIME Berkova 1,2 M., Belov 1 A., Eroshenko 1 E., Yanke 1 V. 1 Institute.
It is considered that until now in the 24th cycle of solar activity 2 ground level enhancements of solar cosmic rays (GLEs) are registered: on May 17,
Multi-spacecraft observations of solar energetic electron events during the rising phase of solar cycle 24 W. Droege 1, R. Gomez-Herrero 2, J. Kartavykh.
GLOBAL SURVEY METHOD: WHAT DO NEUTRON MONITORS SEE? Belov A.1, Eroshenko E.1, Abunin A. 1, Abunina M. 1, Yanke V. 1, Oleneva V.1, Mavromichalaki H.2, Papaioannou.
Extreme Event Symposium 2004 MAGNETOSPHERIC EFFECT in COSMIC RAYS DURING UNIQUE MAGNETIC STORM IN NOVEMBER Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism,
GLOBAL SURVEY METHOD: WHAT DO NEUTRON MONITORS SEE? Belov A.1, Eroshenko E.1, Abunin A. 1, Abunina M. 1, Yanke V. 1, Oleneva V.1, Mavromichalaki H.2, Papaioannou.
A.V. Belov 1, E. A. Eroshenko 1, H. Mavromichalaki 2, V.A. Oleneva 1, A. Papaioannou 2, G. Mariatos 2, V. G. Yanke 1 (1) Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism,
IMF Prediction with Cosmic Rays THE BASIC IDEA: Find signatures in the cosmic ray flux that are predictive of the future behavior of the interplanetary.
1 Test Particle Simulations of Solar Energetic Particle Propagation for Space Weather Mike Marsh, S. Dalla, J. Kelly & T. Laitinen University of Central.
GROUND-LEVEL EVENT (GLE)
ICME in the Solar Wind from STEL IPS Observations
George C. Ho1, David Lario1, Robert B. Decker1, Mihir I. Desai2,
Search for Cosmic Ray Anisotropy with the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station G. LA VACCA University of Milano-Bicocca.
Long-term variations of vector and tensor anisotropies of cosmic rays
Presenter: Paul Evenson
Introduction to Space Weather Interplanetary Transients
Antarctica and the Global Neutron Monitor Network
Investigations of CME in muon flux detected in hodoscopic mode
Forecasting the arrival time of the CME’s shock at the Earth
Alexander Mishev & Ilya Usoskin
About shape of the interplanetary shock front
Introduction to Space Weather
NMDB - the European neutron monitor database
Presentation transcript:

IMF Prediction with Cosmic Rays THE BASIC IDEA: Find signatures in the cosmic ray flux that are predictive of the future behavior of the interplanetary magnetic field High-energy cosmic rays impacting Earth have passed through and interacted with the IMF within a region of size ~1 particle gyroradius – They should retain signatures related to the characteristics of the IMF Neutron monitors respond to ~10 GeV protons – These protons have a gyroradius ~0.04 AU, corresponding to a solar wind transit time of ~4 h Muon detectors respond to ~50 GeV protons – Gyroradius is ~0.2 AU, corresponding to a solar wind transit time of ~20 h The method can potentially fill in the gap between observations at L1 and observations of the Sun

IMF PREDICTION WITH COSMIC RAYS Based on Quasilinear Theory (QLT)

ENSEMBLE-AVERAGING DERIVATION OF THE BOLTZMANN EQUATION: START WITH THE VLASOV EQUATION The equation is relativistically correct

ENSEMBLE AVERAGE THE VLASOV EQUATION

SIMPLIFY THE ENSEMBLE-AVERAGED EQUATION WITH A TRICK For gyrotropic distributions, only ψ 1 matters!

SUBTRACT THE ENSEMBLE-AVERAGED EQUATION FROM THE ORIGINAL EQUATION … THEN LINEARIZE Why “Quasi”–Linear? 2 nd order terms are retained in the ensemble-averaged equation, but dropped in the equation for the fluctuations δf

AFTER LINEARIZING, IT’S EASY TO SOLVE FOR δf BY THE METHOD OF CHARACTERISTICS In effect, this integrates the fluctuating force backwards along the particle trajectory. “z” here is the mean Field direction, NOT GSE North This is like tomography, but using a helical “line of sight”

Equations from Pei

So, the integration of t is solved as

Spaceship Earth Spaceship Earth is a network of neutron monitors strategically deployed to provide precise, real-time, 3- dimensional measurements of the cosmic ray angular distribution: 11 Neutron Monitors on 4 continents Multi-national participation: – Bartol Research Institute, University of Delaware (U.S.A.) – IZMIRAN (Russia) – Polar Geophysical Inst. (Russia) – Inst. Solar-Terrestrial Physics (Russia) – Inst. Cosmophysical Research and Aeronomy (Russia) – Inst. Cosmophysical Research and Radio Wave Propagation (Russia) – Australian Antarctic Dvivision – Aurora College (Canada)

Data Pre-processing To select the intensity variation that would be sensitive to the IMF, we subtract isotropic component and 12 hour trailing-averaged anisotropy from observed NM intensity where f 0 and ξ are determined for each hour from the following best fit function

Data Pre-processing Observed intensity After subtract isotropic component And after subtract 1 st order anisotropic component Data during GLE is removed

Best-fit to the data fit this function to the cosmic ray flux and get 4 parameters A x, A y, p x, p y

estimation of dB * dB obs is calculated as the deviation from 12-hour tr-moving average of observed IMF in GSE coordinate. * dB exp is calculated from the model in IMF coordinate as

Conversion of coordinate IMF coordinate X imf is in X gse -Y gse plane Y imf is pointing north ward, and in Z imf -Z gse plane  X gse Y gse Z gse Z imf X imf Y imf  IMF

A : asymptotic viewing direction of particle calculated from particle trajectory code in gse coordinate then converted to imf coordinate Z imf X imf Y imf A IMF

GSE Lat -180 GSE Lat +180 Pitch angleGyro Phase Away Toward

ICME Events Use ICME List from Richardson & Cane 2010, Solar Phys ists/ICMEtable.html 161 ICMEs are listed from 2001 to 2006 Compare the IMF during the time from the IP Shock arrival time to the ICME end time Use hourly OMNI data (time corrected ACE or WIND) for the comparison of in-situ IMF data ICME Shock

ICME Shock dBz dBz/Bt Bz Bz vs tave of Bz0.1224

dt=0 dt=1 dt=2

Question: why we have good correlation when we use the factor C

0h prediction

Update Feb 18 Don’t use the future IMF data for the estimation of future IMF

estimation of dB * dB obs is calculated as the deviation from 12-hour tr-moving average of observed IMF in GSE coordinate. * dB exp is calculated from the model in IMF coordinate as Background IMF V sw ·Δt IMF x gse

ICME Shock dBz dBz/Bt Bz Bz vs tave of Bz0.1224

B0=5nT

Update Mar 11

0 hour predict 3 hour predict

0 hour predict 3 hour predict

N+/Nall Mean of corr. coeff Median of corr. coeff

6 years of data 0 hour prediction 5 hour prediction

6 years of data (event period only) 0 hour prediction 5 hour prediction

6 years of data (without event period) 0 hour prediction 5 hour prediction